db-ojb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From John McNally <jmcna...@collab.net>
Subject Procedure - Re: [vote] 1.0 final release
Date Tue, 24 Feb 2004 22:40:44 GMT
I hope that what I am saying is not a complete surprise.  Taking a poll
on the dev list regarding a release is a good practice, but official
votes on a release must be done by the PMC.  

The rules of the vote are simply at least 3 +1's and more +1's than -1's
(simple majority).

There was a recent vote by the PMC to increase membership to include 2
more contributors to OJB in addition to Thomas.  Armin accepted this
nomination and will be able to vote within a couple days (there is a 72
hour wait after notification to the board of new members.)

I would suggest Thomas persuade the other OJB nominee to accept the
nomination soon, but not to apply too much pressure.  The PMC should be
committers that want to take on the responsibility.

I would also suggest Thomas bring up this vote on the PMC list, so that
other PMC members who do not follow the daily activity on the dev list
are given the chance to weigh in.  I would not expect there to be a -1
from someone who is not closely associated with the project, but the
opportunity should be given.

The current (and historically in many other projects) thinking amongst
most of the PMC is that a PMC should be as inclusive as possible of the
committers.  It should be made up of at least those who consider
themselves active enough in a codebase that they want to have releases
and are willing to support those releases.  Sometimes it is nice to take
contributions from a prolific coder and to give them committer status
based on their technical skills.  I think it is okay to accept the
contributions of someone like this even though they may not stick around
long enough to become a part of the community, as long as there are
enough other PMC members that feel they can absorb the maintenance of
the code added by such an individual.  But the PMC should include a
majority of the committers or it is going to be seen as a bureaucratic
nuisance. (How many are asking themselves right now, who is this guy
poking his head into our release process :-))

But a community can only handle so many people who only want to code
without any other input.  So I suggest any committers who have been
around for several months and don't like the fact that their +1 vote is
only symbolic to talk with Thomas or Armin about a nomination.

Finally, if the release doesn't get done by Feb 29.  Please do not take
the relicensing requirement after that date as a big hassle.  Even if
you do consider it a big hassle, a 1.1 or even 1.0.1 release after that
date is going to require the new licence.  So unless you keep your HEAD
free from anything that should not go into a 1.0.1 bug fix release, you
will have to do the same work that has to be done on HEAD on a release
branch.  My opinion is that you are in a better position for the new
license now with no past releases under the old license.  But I'm not
doing anything to stop you from doing such a ASL1.1 release.

John McNally
DB PMC Chair  

On Mon, 2004-02-23 at 10:22, Jakob Braeuchi wrote:
> hi all,
> 
> +1
> 
> jakob
> 
> Thomas Mahler wrote:
> > hi all,
> > 
> > Armin and I talked about getting out the 1.0 release. We both think that 
> > it's good to get it out asap.
> > 
> > I propose to assemble the relase during the next weekend (28./29.2.)
> > So I'd like to see your votes, please.
> > 
> > If we get no vetos we'll have to fix some nasty regressions in our testbed.
> > There are three failures in the ODMG layer which can't be fixed without 
> > a major redesign. So I propose to not fix them in 1.0, but to place a 
> > note in the "known issues" section.
> > 
> > The latest changes to the Criteria stuff causes several errors in the 
> > ODMG testcases. I'll have a look at them today.
> > 
> > There are also 5 errors in the OTM tests. they seem to be caused by 
> > incosistencies in the testdata. (constraint violations). OTM developers: 
> > please have a look at those issues, can't be a big problem.
> > 
> > cheers,
> > thomas
> > 
> > 
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
> > 
> > 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org


Mime
View raw message